SOPA Act

David Price's response to me:



Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy on the inside.

Makes me glad he's my representative.

> Representatives opposed to SOPA/PIPA

 > George Miller (D-CA)

Met the man and have seen him (and went to his office in D.C).

Loving that I voted for him a lot more now.

Makes me glad he's my representative.

Forgot about it but he did speak at my graduation for Durham Tech. Pretty cool man.

I'm getting sick and tired of this pomegranate.

http://www.laquadrature.net/acta

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arch...od/242853/

What's with the motherf'ucking lawmakers?

Just to be sure, can anyone read through this and confirm whether or not ISPs are required to store our personal information?

 H.R.1981 Sec. 4

Code:

SEC. 4. RETENTION OF CERTAIN RECORDS BY ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION SERVICE PROVIDERS.

(a) In General- Section 2703 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
     `(h) Retention of Certain Records-
    `(1) A commercial provider of an electronic communication service shall retain for a period of at least one year a log of the temporarily assigned network addresses the provider assigns to a subscriber to or customer of such service that enables the identification of the corresponding customer or subscriber information under subsection (c)(2) of this section.

    `(2) Access to a record or information required to be retained under this subsection may not be compelled by any person or other entity that is not a governmental entity.

    `(3) The Attorney General shall make a study to determine the costs associated with compliance by providers with the requirement of paragraph (1). Such study shall include an assessment of all the types of costs, including for hardware, software, and personnel that are involved. Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this paragraph, the Attorney General shall report to Congress the results of that study.

    `(4) In this subsection--
        `(A) the term `commercial provider' means a provider of electronic communication service that offers Internet access capability for a fee to the public or to such classes of users as to be effectively available to the public, regardless of the facilities used; and
        `(B) the term `Internet' has the same meaning given that term in section 230(f) of the Communications Act of 1934.'.



(b) Sense of Congress- It is the sense of Congress--
    (1) to encourage electronic communication service providers to give prompt notice to their customers in the event of a breach of the data retained pursuant to section 2703(h) of title 18 of the United States Code, in order that those effected can take the necessary steps to protect themselves from potential misuse of private information; and

    (2) that records retained pursuant to section 2703(h) of title 18, United States Code, should be stored securely to protect customer privacy and prevent against breaches of the records.




(c) Transition Rule- The amendment made by this section shall not apply until 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act to a provider of an electronic communications service that does not, on that date of enactment, have in effect a system of retention of records that complies with the requirements of that amendment.




(d) Study-
    (1) The Attorney General, not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act , shall complete a study of providers affected by section 2703(h) of title 18, United States Code.

    (2) Such study shall include--
        (A) the privacy standards and considerations implemented by those providers as they comply with the requirements of section 2703(h); and
        (B) the frequency of any reported breaches of data retained pursuant to section 2703(h).

    (3) The Attorney General shall, upon the completion of the study, report the results of the study to Congress.

Just to be sure, can anyone read through this and confirm whether or not ISPs are required to store our personal information?

huh? Hate to break it to you, but ISPs have always been required to do that. There is a 7 year retention period on absolutely everything you do. That's why people using proxies are essentially just getting a placebo effect; the root still knows exactly what you are doing, and the feds can look up that information at any time with probable cause.

lagperry

As long as companies like Google and Facebook are against whatever they come back with, I don't think it will go through. They would just pay for these SOPA-guys to shut up.

As long as companies like Google and Facebook are against whatever they come back with, I don't think it will go through. They would just pay for these SOPA-guys to shut up.

Because companies like ABC, CBS, Comcast/NBC, NFL, Viacom, Visa, then the MPAA, RIAA, and several big time recording companies are just small time compared to Google or Facebook. Totally.

Also it's so disappointing to see so many supporters from FL. It makes me both glad that I wasn't able to vote during the last election, and even more sad that I live in this state. Even the Senator I met before I could vote (Bill Nelson-D) supports it. ;_;

It`s okay fools, I live in texas. Imagine what I feel.

huh? Hate to break it to you, but ISPs have always been required to do that. There is a 7 year retention period on absolutely everything you do. That's why people using proxies are essentially just getting a placebo effect; the root still knows exactly what you are doing, and the feds can look up that information at any time with probable cause.

Including our bank account and credit card numbers? If it's the feds, they could dig up this information all too easily, why let ISPs store it?

boomabang

huh? Hate to break it to you, but ISPs have always been required to do that. There is a 7 year retention period on absolutely everything you do. That's why people using proxies are essentially just getting a placebo effect; the root still knows exactly what you are doing, and the feds can look up that information at any time with probable cause.

Whoa. Everything? That'd be prohibitively taxing on server resources. I've read they have to retain records of financial transactions for 7 years, is that what you were thinking of?

Proxies conceal the traffic between you and your end contact, not your ISP. However, if the proxy uses encryption, your ISP would have to decrypt the traffic to know what you were doing beyond going to that proxy.

The reason why that clause in the bill is a problem for us Interweb denizens is that ISPs wont be able to plead ignorance when your IP gets slapped with a file sharing suit. They'll say this IP at this time downloaded in this torrent and here's the court ordered proof this IP belonged to this person at the time. They'll be able to prove damages instead of terrorize people into settling.

Additionally, this could effectively outlaw unsecured networks, because the network provider couldn't identify who uses it, as would be required by this law

Including our bank account and credit card numbers? If it's the feds, they could dig up this information all too easily, why let ISPs store it?

The alternative was to trust the banks that all online financial transactions are legitimate... there needs to be some record of who is sending money digitally, just as there is on paper.

I'm relatively certain it is everything, and that they have audits and logs set up for all incoming and outgoing traffic. I never claimed it was an efficient method, and that's why I say they would need probable cause and a lot of information about you already (such as MAC/IP/time of offense), otherwise not only would they not have the authority to view the information (arguable, but legally speaking this is the case), they would have no idea where to even start looking amongst the exabytes of lines of text logs in some of the larger ISPs. A search function can only go so far; even a normal person would collect billions of lines of transit data over the course of 7 years.

I'm relatively certain it is everything, and that they have audits and logs set up for all incoming and outgoing traffic.

I'm relatively certain you could've had better info with barely 2 minutes of googling;

http://swordattheready.wordpress.com/201...or-a-year/
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/FBI-R...ion-106799
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommuni..._retention

It's 12 months. Not 84. And only very specific info.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-200849...ping-bill/

I'm relatively certain you could've had better info with barely 2 minutes of googling;

http://swordattheready.wordpress.com/201...or-a-year/
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/FBI-R...ion-106799
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommuni..._retention

It's 12 months. Not 84. And only very specific info.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-200849...ping-bill/

Well then, I guess my paranoia got the better of me on this one. I always thought that VPN was the only way to truly transfer data that can't be accessed later at the ISP level. A year is still quite a lot of data, but nowhere near as bad as 7 I suppose.

However, from what I'm seeing from that last article, it isn't just specific information...

It represents "a data bank of every digital act by every American" that would "let us find out where every single American visited Web sites"

The original version of the bill, introduced in May, required Internet providers to "retain for a period of at least 18 months the temporarily assigned network addresses the service assigns to each account, unless that address is transmitted by radio communication." The wireless exemption appeared to be the result of lobbying from major carriers, but drew the ire of the Justice Department, which says it didn't go far enough

however, it does make a distinction between retention and preservation that I did not know about,

"Retention" vs. "preservation"
At the moment, Internet service providers typically discard any log file that's no longer required for business reasons such as network monitoring, fraud prevention, or billing disputes. Companies do, however, alter that general rule when contacted by police performing an investigation--a practice called data preservation.

A 1996 federal law called the Electronic Communication Transactional Records Act regulates data preservation. It requires Internet providers to retain any "record" in their possession for 90 days "upon the request of a governmental entity."

Is the "preservation" period still only 90 days, or was it increased to the full year with this bill?

However, from what I'm seeing from that last article, it isn't just specific information...

"every single visited website" is rather specific information. It doesn't include what was done there, nor does it include far more personal things like the contents of every email, IM, IRC and similar you should engage in or every NNTP article you read.

Is the "preservation" period still only 90 days, or was it increased to the full year with this bill?

The bill just set a default standard for that degree of minimum info they had to retain for 12 months.
The 90 day preservation of full data is still in effect. Just think of it as tiers of data, once it passes the 90 days they drop to the more vague info, once it passes a year they can drop it completely.

Just FYI SOPA still exists as The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011.

Good luck opposing that.

The bill just set a default standard for that degree of minimum info they had to retain for 12 months.
The 90 day preservation of full data is still in effect. Just think of it as tiers of data, once it passes the 90 days they drop to the more vague info, once it passes a year they can drop it completely.

That's what I thought it was saying.

However, you have to remember, these are people from Congress, who have little idea as to what they are talking about on this subject; they may think that "website" is everything the internet has to offer. I have not seen the bill's specifics nor would I understand the majority of the jargon without a great deal of deciphering, so I do not know if that is an accurate description or not...

Just FYI SOPA still exists as The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011.

Good luck opposing that.

Also can't forget the Anti Counterfeit Trade Agreement.

Also can't forget the Anti Counterfeit Trade Agreement.

I'll look that up in a minute but my point was

It's really, really hard for anyone to seriously stand up against a bill that's supposedly about child pornography. And Obama isn't likely to veto it because... imagine how bad that would look.